KEEPING UP WITH THE JONESES: SOCIOECONOMIC CLASS REPRESENTATION IN SITCOMS by ALEXANDRA HICKS A THESIS Presented to the School of Journalism and Communication and the Robert D. Clark Honors College in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Bachelor of Arts June 2014 A• Abstracto( the Thesis of Alexandra Hicks for 1he degree ofBachelor of Arts in the School of Journalism and Communication to be talcen June, 2014 Title: Keeping Up With the Jonescs: Socioeconomic Class Representation in Sitcoms Awroa:&~ This thesis examines the representation of socioeconomic class in situation comedies. Through the influence of the advertising industiy, situation comedies (sitcoms) have developed a pattem throughout history of misrepresenting ~ial class, which is made evident by their portrayals ofdifferent races, genders, and professions. To rectify the IKk ofprevious studies on modem comedies, this study analyzes socioeconomic class representation on sitcoms that have aired in the last JS years by taking a sample ofseven shows and comparing the estimated cost of characters' residences to the amount of money they would likely earn in their given profession. 1be study showed that modem situation comedies misrepresent socioeconomic class by portraying characters living in residences well beyond what they could afford in real life. Accurate demonstration ofsocioeconomic class on television is imperative be<:ause images presented on television genuinely influence viewers• perceptions of reality. Inaccurate portrayals ofclass could cause audiences to develop distorted views ofmember.; of socioeconomic classes and themselves. u Acknowledgements I would like to thank Professor Debra Merskin for inspiring me to examine television in an in-depth and critical manner. I have been fortunate enough to study multiple types of media with Professor Merskin and the ways in which they represent (or rather, misrepresent) various marginalized groups of people. She taught me that all people are not created equal – they each have their own individual qualities as well as obstacles that deserve to be recognized. I am so thankful that she had such a strong influence not only on my academic pursuits, but on the way in which I view my fellow human beings. I would also like to thank Professor Sandler and Professor Prazniak for their support throughout this challenging process. Lastly, I must acknowledge my mother, Rebecca Hicks. Without her (not-so-subtle) push, I would have never entered the Clark Honors College and embarked on the single most rewarding experience of my academic career thus far. iii Table of Contents Introduction 1 False Consciousness 4 Background 10 The 1950s and the Influence of Advertising 13 Race and Class 16 Gender and Class 23 Profession and Class 29 Working-Class Representation 36 Research Study: Class and Residence in Modern Sitcoms 40 2 Broke Girls (Max and Caroline) 41 Sex and the City (Carrie Bradshaw) 44 FRIENDS (Monica Gellar and Rachel Green) 46 How I Met Your Mother (Ted Mosby) 49 The Big Bang Theory (Penny) 51 Modern Family (The Dunphy Family) 53 Analysis 55 Conclusion 59 Bibliography 62 iv Introduction While television has a significant presence American society, it has not necessarily used its expansive breadth to discuss controversial issues. Recently, however, popular programs have begun to address such “taboo” topics as race, gender, and sexuality. Despite this recent progress, one subject has been notably absent from this representation: class. This is particularly evident in situation comedies. While the earliest situation comedies featured lower- class families1, the introduction of advertising and product placement in the 1950s contributed to the construction of a consumer-driven middle class and the notion of the “classless society” that Americans find so comfortable (Leistyna, et. al, 2005). While little formal research has been done on the matter, it is likely that American discomfort in regards to discussing class stems from the concept of the American Dream. This idea, long hailed as the backbone and driving force of our country, implies that anyone can achieve success (which, in this society, is synonymous with economic success) with two simple ingredients: passion and hard work. Acknowledging that there are class disparities goes against the fabric on which this very country was built (Leistyna et. al., 2005). If all people are created equal, does that mean they all have equal opportunities to ascend the socioeconomic ladder? Different groups of people face particular sets of obstacles, whether the result of race, gender, sexuality, or social class – some of which are impossible to overcome without major institutional changes. As such, money is rarely directly addressed in sitcoms in favor of perpetuating the illusion of the American Dream and a “classless” society (Apler & Leistyna, 2005). 1 The terms “lower-class,” “working-class,” and “middle-class” as used throughout this paper refer only to economic position. Gerbner’s “theory of cultivation” states that “watching a great deal of television will be associated with a tendency to hold specific and distinct perceptions of reality” based on the images projected (Gerbner, Gross, Morgan, & Signorielli, 1986, p. 17). This essentially means that watching television consistently will ultimately affect the viewer’s vision of the real world. Given that Americans watch on average 5.11 hours of television each day (A.C. Nielson Co., 2013), it can be assumed that images perpetuated by situation comedies can genuinely affect the American population’s perception of socioeconomic disparity. By primarily featuring characters without any evidence of financial struggle, sitcoms create a distorted representation of the true makeup of American society than genuinely affects viewer’s real-world perceptions. My thesis addresses all of the aforementioned topics, focusing on sitcoms as they were the first programs on television to feature the same characters in each episode with a central location, allowing viewers to get a complete image of their socioeconomic situation (Grote, 12). First I will begin by discussing the concept of “false consciousness” and how misrepresentations on television can have real-world effects on viewers (Jost, 1995, p. 389). I then briefly discuss the background of sitcoms and their origins on television. I then analyze how the advertising industry in the 1950s altered the contents of sitcoms completely, constructing the “middle-class” that dominates television today. I then discuss how socioeconomic class has been constructed since the 1950s. Because economic class is not often directly addressed on sitcoms, I will use three different identifiers to analyze how economic class is presented and whether or not this is consistent with actual U.S. demographics. I begin with race, focusing on African American and Latino characters. Then, I discuss gender, in 2 particular women and single mothers. Next, I discuss professions presented on television in comparison to actual profession distribution. I then briefly describe the few representations of the working-class in sitcoms. While race, gender, and profession on sitcoms up until the 1990s has been frequently written about, there is remarkably little information indicating class representation on sitcoms over the last 15 years. To rectify this, I conducted my own study in which I analyzed the residences of characters in seven sitcoms that aired in the last 15 years. By estimating the cost of each character’s living space through discussions with real estate agencies then comparing these costs to the character’s likely salaries, it is then possible to see whether or not the character could actually afford the lifestyle they are maintaining on television, thus revealing whether or not modern sitcoms accurately represent socioeconomic class in the United States. Through research of past studies combined with my individual research, I will ultimately answer the following research questions (1) how has socioeconomic class been represented on sitcoms throughout history (2) can characters on modern sitcoms afford their residences given their professions? (3) how does this frame socioeconomic class on sitcoms and (4) how might these representations this affect members of the working-class? Determining the answers to these questions has significant importance because television genuinely affects people and their societal views. If sitcoms are misrepresenting socioeconomic class, members of each class will have a distorted view of themselves and others, ultimately preventing the awareness necessary for social progress. 3 False Consciousness Before discussing the ways in which situation comedies have inaccurately framed socioeconomic class, it is imperative to first understand why it is that television affects viewers’ thoughts on real-life situations and the negative impact it has on their view of themselves. While cultivation theory demonstrates that heavy television viewership can affect one’s real-life perceptions, it is the Marxian theory of “false consciousness” that explains the genuine negative affects these distortions can have on viewers’ consciousness and actions. The political origins of this theory often lead to skepticism about its validity as a social or psychological theory (Augoustinos, 1995, p. 295). The concept of false consciousness was developed by Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels in 1846 (Jost, 1995, p. 389). Though most widely-known for The Communist Manifesto, they wrote about political